SD-ALL: Skelos Puts Bullseyes On Certain Senate Democrats

by: robert.harding

Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 16:48:46 PM EST

Courtesy of Liz:

There were also Republican successes, albeit slightly less high-profile, in Monroe, Erie and Onondaga counties, Skelos noted, all of which are home to marginal Democrats who have been in the GOP crosshairs in the past.

   "If you're Bill Stachowski, Dave Valesky, Darrel Aubertine, Andrea Stewart-Cousins, Craig Johnson or Brian Foley, I think you have some cause for concern," Skelos told me yesterday.

   "We've had people approaching us and asking to run against Democratic incumbents whereas in the past we've had to go out and seek candidates to run," the senator continued. "Even some candidates who maybe fell a little short, we're going to look at all of them. Some of them ran terrific campaigns and perhaps are ready to go for the Senate."

So if we go by what Skelos is saying, his targets are clear: SD-3, SD-7, SD-35, SD-48, SD-49 and SD-58.

Without challengers, it will be tough to gauge just how vulnerable those six seats are. Keep in mind that Skelos gave us Barbara Donno in SD-7 last year, so it's not as if Skelos has a good record to work with. He was, after all, the leader when the Republicans lost the majority last year.

Patronage And Power Part II

by: robert.harding

Thu Jul 09, 2009 at 22:12:53 PM EDT

With the news today that Sen. Espada will rejoin the Senate Democratic caucus and as a result, will serve as Senate Majority Leader, it is hard to argue that what the Republicans (along with Espada) did on June 8 and what the Democrats have done (again, with Espada) on July 9 are any different. What the Republicans did was an obvious power grab. What the Democrats have done, along with the Republicans, is hold the state senate hostage until one of them got the result they wanted.

The losers today are the people of New York, who have been put on the back burner in favor of posturing and a disgusting lust for power that has distracted the legislature away from the people's business for a long time. The people of New York have lost out over the last month with key legislation not being addressed and a group of state senators putting their interests first and the interests of the state last. We deserve better. In fact, we deserve 62 better senators.

But the winners are clear. The winners don't include either the Senate Republicans or the Senate Democrats. Both are guilty of having a lust for power, but their lust isn't as great as Pedro Espada's. Espada might be with the Democrats, but he will receive special perks. He will get to name one of the two co-secretaries of the Senate, with the Senate Democrats picking the other. Espada ally and coup coordinator Steve Pigeon is also getting a job, according to the Times-Union. And if Pigeon is getting a job, that means inside access to the New York State Senate for Florida billionaire Tom Golisano.

So how does this help things? At least now, the Senate will be able to get to work and address key issues. But at what price? The Senate Democrats (the leadership anyway, maybe not each individual senator in the conference) have sold their souls to Espada. In doing so, they should face the same scrutiny that Espada shall face going forward. And that also means that in 2010, we should look at serious primary challenges to those individuals who think that the people's business is something that can be toyed with.

Many of us, including myself, worked very hard in our efforts to elect a Senate Democratic majority in 2008. I did not work hard to elect a Pedro Espada majority. Pedro Espada represents everything that is wrong with our legislative process and everything that is wrong with politics and governance in New York. Why the same Democratic leadership that I assisted in getting elected the majority is siding with this walking disaster is troubling and makes me feel as if all that hard work in pushing out Republicans who did nothing for 40-plus years (even though they tried to take the high road a month ago) was for nothing.

I advocated for a Democratic majority, not Pedro Espada. The Senate Democrats need to ask themselves who they work for. Because right now, it seems like Pedro Espada has them in the palm of his hand. And that is a bad thing for New York and bad for the Democratic Party.

Where Do We Go From Here?

by: robert.harding

Tue Jun 09, 2009 at 11:17:49 AM EDT

So who should we go after? Who needs to be targeted? The list is long:

- ESPADA: This is a guy who is a model for why we need campaign finance reform in New York. It would be nice if he obeyed the current laws that aren't as strong as they need to be, but still exist for a reason. He has no morals, he has no ethics and the Republicans are okay with that. Sen. Dean Skelos is quoted as saying that such issues (Espada's campaign finance issues and investigations along with Monserrate's assault indictment) take a backseat to "reform." I'm sorry, but they don't. Espada isn't above the law. And he isn't above the people of this state who voted for a Democratic majority in 2008 only to have it robbed by the power hungry Espada and his sidekick Monserrate.

MONSERRATE: Monserrate has serious legal issues that could lead to him being ousted from office. Again, Skelos doesn't seem to care because of the short-term gain. But Monserrate, if convicted, will be forced from his seat. The case against Monserrate is a very serious matter. Monserrate, along with Espada, shouldn't be a poster boy for reform. The fact that he is one of the faces attached to this attempted coup and the questionable reform legislation that the GOP passed in the aftermath is terrible for New York.

TOM GOLISANO: Golisano was whining awhile back that he was making his legal residence Florida because of high taxation. As I stated at the time, the $5 million Golisano claims to be saving by making his legal residence in Florida is the same amount he put down as a fund for Responsible New York. Now, he is touting his involvement in this backroom deal (the same backroom deals he criticizes and is supposedly against) as reform. This isn't reform. This is a pampered billionaire getting what he wants.

If you think Espada has a hunger for power, that pales in comparison to the hunger for power that Golisano has. Golisano has hospitals named after him. He owns a sports team. He hands out money like it was candy at a parade. He tried to muscle the Democratic majority (the same one he invested in) and he didn't get what he wanted. So now, he has decided to try the Republicans and see if they will budge.

SENATE REPUBLICANS: These 30 senators should be embarrassed that they chose this time - arguably the most important time (aside from the budget) on the legislative calendar - to turn the Senate upside down. They put their political interests ahead of the serious issues and problems this state faces. The 19 million people of New York did not need this. If they weren't happy with losing the majority, 2010 was their chance. Now, we face uncertainty all because the Senate Republicans, on the taxpayer's time, decided that politics was more important than addressing key issues like reproductive health, campaign finance reform, among many others.

We need to go after all of the characters involved. We can target them one at a time or all of them at the same time. Mark my words: Espada will not be representing the 33rd Senate District come January 2011. Monserrate will not be representing the 13th Senate District come January 2011. And the Senate Republicans will be the minority - again.

As for Tom Golisano, I am ready to go to war with the pampered billionaire. He claims he does things in the name of progress and reform, but all that matters to him is power. And power for Golisano comes in the form of spending money and brokering deals such as this one. If Espada is another example of why we need campaign finance reform, then Golisano is another great example too.

All of these individuals and groups need to be targeted. They might think they won in the short-term. But they have a big shock coming to them in the long-term.

Quid Pro Quo? Senate Republicans Got Campaign Money, Company Got Lease

by: robert.harding

Mon Mar 02, 2009 at 09:42:07 AM EST

Dicker's piece is a good starting point, but here is what the piece is lacking.

Starting on January 1, 2003, Omni Management Group LTD received a lease totaling $7,916,534.58. The contract runs out at the end of 2011, so the length and price of the contract is quite substantial.

But Omni Development, which Omni Management Group, Ltd. is a part of, has been a gracious donor to the New York State Senate Republicans over the years.

- A search for "Omni Development" in the Board of Elections campaign finance database finds that "Omni Development Company" gave $64,375.00 to the Senate Republicans from August 2000 to December 2007. "Omni Development Company" also contributed $3,500 to Sen. Joe Bruno's campaign fund from February 1999 to January 2004.

- A search for "Omni Management" finds that Omni Management Group, Ltd. gave $51,975.00 to the Senate Republicans from 2001 to 2007. In addition, Omni Management Group also gave $583.34 to the state Republican Party and $2,000 to Sen. Bruno's campaign committee.

- A search for "Omni Housing Development" finds that Omni Housing Development made 12 contributions to the New York State Senate Republican Committee totaling $58,350.00.

- In addition to the three groups that are under Omni's name, two of Omni's top officers - David Swawite and Richard Zipes - also made contributions to the Senate Republicans. Swawite made a $30,000 contribution on Oct. 31, 2002 and Zipes made a $30,000 contribution on Oct. 31, 2002 - the same day as Swawite's. Swawite is the President and COO of Omni and  Zipes is the Chairman and CEO of Omni.

Both men making $30,000 contributions on the same day a mere two months before their $7.9 million moneymaker went into effect.

If you think this is shady, you would be correct. There is plenty wrong with this and just the appearance of impropriety can be worse than actual impropriety.  

L & P Media President A Past Republican Donor

by: robert.harding

Thu Feb 19, 2009 at 09:57:20 AM EST

The web vendor is L & P Media. We know that they have been the provider of services for the Republicans over the years. But it looks like the head of L & P Media also gave something back.

According to this report from Albany-based The Business Review, the President of L & P Media is a man named John Daniels. According to campaign finance reports, Daniels gave $755 to Republicans from 2003 to 2005.

This is how it breaks down:

- On Sept. 11, 2003, Daniels gave $250 to the New York State Republican Committee. Almost two months prior to that, Daniels' company, Light and Power Media, was paid $6,336 by the New York State Senate Republican Campaign Committee.

- On August 19, 2004, Daniels gave $500 to the New York State Republican Committee.

- In 2005, Daniels gave a small donation of $5 to the New York State Senate Republican Campaign Committee.

It wasn't until 2006 that big money started flowing L & P Media's way. According to the total expenditures paid to L & P Media, they were paid $108,378.72 for their services, which included work for the Senate Republicans and work for individual Republican senators, including Sen. Charles Fuschillo and newly-elected Sen. Roy McDonald, who is serving the same district that Joe Bruno previously represented.

In fairness to Daniels, he did give $1,000 to Eliot Spitzer's gubernatorial campaign. But that isn't what has gotten him in the news recently. Sure, the contributions he made weren't during the time he was making big money from the Senate Republicans, but this just raises more questions about the practices of the Senate Republicans and using a company to do work in a government capacity and in a political capacity.

Governor Paterson: "Pull a Spitzer" and Increase Our Majority!

by: BingChester

Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 18:52:56 PM EST

So here's an idea; what if Governor Paterson recruits a Senate Republican into his administration, thereby freeing up a seat for a special election?

Senators Squashing Talk Of Retirement, Other Possibilities

by: robert.harding

Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 13:29:48 PM EDT

Sen. Caesar Trunzo, Sen. Andrew Lanza, Sen. John Bonacic and Sen. Joe Robach all gave updates on their futures.

Long Island Sen. Caesar Trunzo, who, at 81 is the Senate's oldest member, said he will seek another term, adding: "I'm going to continue running."

Sen. Andrew Lanza, who some speculated might reconsider his decision not to a run for retiring Rep. Vito Fossella's seat, said Bruno's announcement will have no impact on his plans.

"All the reasons I originally discussed for my decision still apply," Lanza said, citing wanting to be closer to his young family, the "toxic climate" of Washington, D.C., and a greater ability to deliver for Staten Island as a state senator.

Lanza said he had re-thought a congressional run after the death Sunday morning of Frank Powers, but ultimatey decided against it.

Sen. Joseph Robach, a Democrat-turned-Republican and a top target of the Senate Democrats this fall, said he too will seek re-election. He also downplayed the lack of an upstate leader.

"The leader has to be responsive to his membership," Robach said, adding that most of the GOP conference hails from upstate.

Sen. John Bonacic, an Orange County Republican who was the only senator to call for Bruno to step down from his leadership post after he revealed in December 2006 the FBI investigation of his outside business interests, said he, too, will run.

Bonacic, in fact, said the conference might be better off without Bruno.

"I see this as an opportunity for our conference," he said. "We have to get away the past politics."

I can't imagine Robach and Bonacic bowing out, but anything is possible. I don't believe Trunzo, at least at this point. He certainly could run, but with Bruno out I don't think anyone could see it as anything but bad news for the Senate GOP. Lanza is an interesting case because he would make a strong candidate for NY-13 but didn't run because he was asked by Bruno to stay in the Senate.

One thing I have learned in politics is that talk is cheap. Trunzo might say he's running today but in a week will he feel the same way?

We'll see. These are only four senators, two of which weren't really being mentioned as senators who might not run for reelection. But anything is possible.